Building on "Collective Intelligence": Learning From Potsdam's Spectacular Postwar Reconstruction

The 62nd IMCL Conference will study the many important lessons of this stunning renaissance - including the genetic intelligence of revival architectures

ABOVE: The transition in Potsdam from a grim "modern" urbanism to the more humanist landscape of prewar Germany, as shown in a remarkable video by The Aesthetic City (click to view). New research shows that the older city in fact demonstrates a more "modern" scientific understanding of the best human environments and their characteristic geometries.

POTSDAM, GERMANY - From October 15th through 19th this year, the 40th Anniversary International Making Cities Livable (IMCL) conference will be held in this beautiful city, with an exceptionally rich history of urban and architectural patterns. The locale also offers a case study in the new scientific understanding of the power of evolutionary refinement, and the "collective intelligence" embodied in the best human environments.

The IMCL conferences are always focused on finding the best solutions to meet our urban challenges, from whatever source and whatever period. We do that by gathering to share knowledge at instructive and inspiring locales. Some of the best solutions will often be fresh and innovative -- but many of the best ones will have evolved through careful refinement over decades and centuries, arising from the complex workings of human collective intelligence. These solutions often take the form of rich and useful patterns, expressed in the most successful, well-loved and enduring places today.

But there is a peculiar idea circulating nowadays, one that is still dominant in too many circles -- that such patterns are no longer relevant, that they are laden with too much of the political baggage of the past, or they are simply not "authentic" to a "modern" era.

Let us call this idea what it is. It is idiocy. And it is disproven by a growing body of evidence.

New findings in the sciences demonstrate clearly that human environments, like other structures in the Universe, typically evolve, differentiate and refine over time. Through their structural evolution, and the actions of the distributed agents who serve as human contributors, these places grow more rich and more beautiful, and they expand their capacity to improve the well-being and health of people and place. They are not less sophisticated than most novel solutions: indeed, they are often more so.

Sometimes too, the beautiful and successful patterns of the past suffer catastrophes, and their memory brings discomfort. Sometimes they are associated with painful periods of history, and there is a temptation to forget about them, and to "move on." This has been the case in Potsdam, Germany, the beautiful royal city of Prussia built by and for Prussian kings and German Emperors prior to 1918. Following the city's near-total destruction in World War II, however, while there was a general desire to preserve a few museum pieces from its history, the rest of the city was to be replaced by more "appropriate" or "authentic" contemporary buildings. The results were... not satisfactory, by the judgments of most people.

This "modern" approach failed to recognize the embodied intelligence of the previous patterns -- not merely as historic relics, but as living patterns of what Kevin Lynch called "good city form." Instead of understanding how such structures could improve human life and health, planners and architects in Potsdam, as in other places, made a series of crude and catastrophic mistakes: too many cars and roads, too many cold blank buildings, too many fragmented, isolating, deadening places.

This was not collective intelligence, but collective stupidity.

ABOVE: The Alter Markt area today.

New research is demonstrating that, far from incorporating "backward" or "inauthentic" patterns -- as some architectural ideologues still claim -- Potsdam and other historic cities embody highly intelligent and still-useful patterns of human settlement, capable of enduring, and indeed of promoting human flourishing. While they may express particular stylistic or culturally unique symbolic characteristics, they also typically incorporate deeper universal patterns of life-enhancing environmental structure -- patterns that are not only still relevant today, but are essential in meeting our daunting urban and planetary challenges.

The fallacy that such places are "backward" and no longer "appropriate to our time" is easily disproven by the evident fact that such patterns, when revived, have produced some of the most successful and best-loved places in human history, even up to the present day. (Their ecological performance is often far superior too, which is not a coincidence.) The success rate of "modern" environments, by comparison is -- let us not mince words -- dismal.

Nor are these patterns only useful in reconstructing historic environments. They are also demonstrably beneficial in creating wholly new buildings and neighborhoods, applying the enriching capacities of traditional patterns and characteristics. (And of course, new expressions can always be added to the old -- as was always the case in the "fugue" of history.)

There is demonstrable and growing evidence that these patterns are superior, that they have salutary effects, and that to deny their benefits to our clients and the public increasingly appears to be -- to put it bluntly -- an unconscionable form of professional malpractice.

While the IMCL conferences share practical and research knowledge about making cities livable from around the world -- and embracing local architectures from local places -- one of the most valuable experiences of the IMCL conferences is the opportunity to learn from the locales where the conferences are located. In that sense, Potsdam is an especially fitting venue: it offers a "teachable moment" about the tragic events and miscalculations of its history, as well as the intelligent beauty of its patterns, and the opportunities for their revival.

As a case study, we will learn about Potsdam's sad fate during World War II, when the city became the target of devastating Allied bombing. Its beautiful Alter Markt square, with stunning architectural treasures (including St. Nicholas Church designed by Karl Friedrich Schinkel), was almost totally destroyed.

ABOVE: The Alter Markt after bombing.

Another form of devastation happened after the war, when the East German government replaced many of Potsdam's remaining beautiful historic buildings with "modern" buildings that could most charitably be called "expedient." While the older buildings reflected centuries of architectural evolution and refinement, the new structures followed the dictates of early 20th century architecture to "start from zero" (Gropius), to let "mechanization take command" (Giedion), and to redefine architecture as "machines for living in" (Le Corbusier). At best, such buildings served as gigantic sculptures, more attentive to the artistic prerogatives of the architects than to the needs and desires of the users and citizens. While such buildings are still often popular with architects, research surveys show that most non-architects find them ugly, uninviting, and even dispiriting. Evidence for the success of this regime, from a broader human point of view, can best be described as "unsatisfactory".

Indeed, recent research has begun to show that such buildings and settlement patterns are not merely unpleasant to their occupants -- they have a negative impact on the health and well-being of all who have to live in and around them. (We will explore some of this research evidence at the conference.) They also have an indirect impact on the health of natural ecologies, relying as they do on mechanized and functionally segregated systems including automobiles, highways, concrete infrastructure, parking lots, and many other ecologically disruptive structures. These places are much less reliant on pedestrian movement at more compact human scales, and they sacrifice the vital benefits of face-to-face interaction within inviting public spaces. (Slapping them into fragmented park-like settings seems to have only partially mitigating effects, and might constitute a form of "greenwashing".)

But in this light, the more recent history of Potsdam is inspiring. The city has entered a new chapter as a much more livable city, featuring a stunning revival of many of its historic buildings as well as new buildings built on traditional patterns. During the planning of these projects, there has been heated debate about whether this revival was "authentic" -- often pitting isolated architectural ideologues against larger citizen groups and professionals from outside the profession of architecture. The tide seems to be turning against the ideologues, who appear increasingly isolated. A proper assessment of the new research evidence -- not ideological cant, rigid habits or orthodox dogma from the previous century -- is long overdue. (Talk about those mired in the past!)

We will hear from some of the people who were responsible for Potsdam's renaissance, and learn from their challenges and successes. They include Thomas Albrecht, one of the architects of the transformation. We will have an opportunity to debate the issues and examine the actual evidence. (Certainly, let us invite those who defend the modernist status quo to present their case.) And of course we will learn about many other case studies and research findings from around the world, about how to meet our urban and planetary challenges in the ways we shape buildings (and thereafter they shape us) -- and in many other aspects of urban structure and building systems.

We will also hear from our hosts, including Bart Urban of The Aesthetic City (producers of remarkable videos like the one above). They are documenting the changing thinking about what is "modern" and what is universal and humane in our cities, towns and suburbs -- and how to make them healthier, more beautiful, more durable, more just -- and yes, more livable.

While there, we can also enjoy the stunning Sanssouci Park, a UNESCO World Heritage Site with many architectural and landscape treasures. A few of these treasures are shown below.

We hope you will join us for an exceptional gathering! https://www.imcl.online/potsdam-2025

Editors Announce Volume II of "The Art of the New Urbanism," Invite Submissions

The second volume will cover 2010-2025, and will include master plans, finished renderings, process sketches, travel sketches, documentation drawings, architectural plans and elevations, diagrams, photography, computer graphics, and more; Interested parties are encouraged to submit their work through the August 15th deadline.

The just published book The Art of the New Urbanism, Volume 1, was edited by James Dougherty, an upcoming speaker at the 62nd International Making Cities Livable conference in Potsdam, Germany, and Charles C. Bohl of the University of Miami, with contributions from Victor Dover, Principal-in-Charge at Dover, Kohl & Partners. They have just announced an open Call for Submissions for Volume 2.

This beautifully illustrated volume serves as the first comprehensive visual compendium of the New Urbanism movement, covering its formative three decades. But it isn't just about pretty pictures: it's about visual communication and co-design, working with clients and the public to forge a humane vision articulated in graphical form, integrating the multiple and sometimes conflicting forces of human need, economic dynamics, technological constraints, and evolving political will. These drawings are not only essential guides to further implementation, but as this book demonstrates, they are frequently beautiful works of art in their own right.

The book is a testament to the remarkable progress of New Urbanism as a critical reform movement. As the book makes clear, its practitioners are engaging with citizens and users in a fundamentally different way, responding to their preferences and needs, through charrettes and other collaborative methods, and by building on the proven successes of nature, history, and traditional precedent.

While new technologies do play a role, they are never allowed to displace the fundamental relationship between human collaborators, including users. We’re also reminded that the core of any design process is visual communication, the common language of an iterative collaboration that emphasizes listening as much as talking.

While the results are often beautiful works of art in their own right, make no mistake, this is not “art for art’s sake” – a means to impose gigantic ungainly sculptures on an unwilling public, or to market dubious new schemes that, judging from history, are only likely to produce ever more unhappy results. On the contrary, this is a disciplined use of art aimed at reforming professions in need of it, and enriching the lives of people and place.

The expansive volume brings together over 200 hand-drawn and digital renderings, master plans, site illustrations, photographs, and precedent studies created by more than 100 architects and urban designers. Beyond merely showcasing these works, the book provides thoughtful commentary and essays explaining the design principles, techniques, and the role visual storytelling played in shaping walkable, sustainable communities—and in engaging both professionals and the public in the planning process.

Example images from The Art of the New Urbanism, Volume 1.

James Dougherty reports:

"We are in the process of preparing Volume 2, 2010-2025. There will be a new exhibition, concurrent with the printing of the new volume. We are seeking examples of all of the types of images that New Urbanists [and their allied movements] use in their work: master plans, finished renderings, process sketches, travel sketches, documentation drawings, architectural plans and elevations, diagrams, photography etc.  (While most of the book will focus on the more recent works, we are also going to devote some space in the book to seminal images from the prior era that we might have missed).

"The deadline for submissions was August 1^st, but we are holding the submissions portal open a bit longer and sending invitations to select designers and illustrators who we would still love to receive work from.

"There is a form there to fill in captions, titles, credits, permission to publish, etc. for each image. The artworks themselves can be as large as 20MB filesize. We recommend submitting images at as high a resolution as possible, but certainly no less than 300dpi. (The selected artworks will be both published in Vol 2 and printed at various scales for the 2026 exhibition.)

"Once the images are all received, the jury will convene and take on the the hard choices about which images/projects/practitioners to include, achieving a wide range of subject matter, scales, media, and the like. I foresee that if there is an image that the jury really wants to include but we need a higher rez file, we’d contact the submitters and ask them to rescan or submit a better file."

Interested parties can submit (up to ten artworks per person) via the portal at www.artofthenewurbanism.com

Another page from The Art of the New Urbanism, Volume 1.

Beyond the Architectural Style Debates: Why We Might Say "It’s the Geometry, Stupid” (?)

New research confirms the transcendent (and surprisingly cutting-edge) qualities of built environments that enrich our lives and promote our well-being – and that may be the key to the durable, flourishing, livable cities, towns and suburbs we must build for the future

ABOVE: A few examples of the endless rich geometries from around the world and across eras, including a contemporary example. Also included are several examples of naturally occurring geometries that are related. We naturally perceive these geometries as beautiful -- and as research shows, they promote our well-being, and the livability of our environments.

Amid the often-heated arguments over modern versus traditional architecture, we risk missing a deeper and more consequential truth: that the human response to the built environment is not primarily an issue of style, but one of geometry. New research shows that, from Kyoto to Cairo, from Renaissance Florence to indigenous villages in Africa and the Americas, traditional architectures around the world and across history all have exhibited commonly recurring geometric patterns—hierarchical scales, gradients of detail, symmetry and asymmetry in balance, spatial enclosure, and other perceptual cues that foster a sense of harmony, coherence, and livability.

Yet too often, debates rage about the “correct” style that is appropriate to our time. So many of those debates over architecture devolve into shouting matches over who is “pastiche”, who is “arrogant”, who is “modern”, who is "reactionary", and so on—but it seems these arguments miss the point. Perhaps, paraphrasing the famous slogan of the 1992 Clinton campaign about the economy in the US, we could say, it’s not the style, “it’s the geometry, stupid.”

Cutting-edge research across multiple disciplines, including neuroscience, environmental psychology, urban planning, and architecture, is revealing that certain geometric qualities of the built environment are deeply connected to our health, our well-being, and our sense of beauty and enjoyment. These qualities go beyond style or historical period. Instead, they reflect a kind of spatial logic, found across many cultures and eras: patterns of complex symmetry, web-network relationships, integrated scales, fractal complexity, and coherent structure featuring "organized complexity"—all of which mirror characteristics of the natural world.

These qualities are found in abundance in many traditional architectures around the world and through history. Unfortunately, they are all too rare in contemporary environments, where technocratic or artistic prerogatives dominate - often with harmful consequences for health and well-being.

Studies show that environments exhibiting the geometric properties of natural environments tend to reduce stress, promote cognitive restoration, and improve well-being. They're also more likely to be perceived as beautiful or harmonious. This isn't merely a matter of taste—it’s a matter of how our brains and bodies respond to the spaces around us, and whether that's conducive to our well-being, or harmful.

These geometric characteristics also shape how we engage with our environment in practical and ecological ways. Neighborhoods that embody such qualities often include human-scale proportions, walkable street networks, and diverse, textured façades. Their appealing characteristics encourage walking, cycling, lingering, and outdoor activity -- behaviors that are not only healthier for individuals, but also for communities and the planet. They reduce car dependency, lower emissions, and allow people to live well in more compact, resource-efficient neighborhoods. The form and pattern of these places—tree-lined streets, public squares, and intricate streetscapes—often mimic ecological systems themselves, with diverse, layered, and interconnected structures that support resilience and adaptability.

Importantly, these qualities also foster stronger social interaction, an important antidote to the social isolation and divisiveness that is increasingly common today. When people feel comfortable, stimulated, and safe in their environment, they are more likely to spend time outside their homes—walking, lingering, talking to neighbors, and engaging in public life. Urban form that supports this kind of sociability tends to include pedestrian-friendly streets, places to gather, mixed-use buildings, and visual cues that draw people out and invite engagement. The geometry of these places—whether a graceful curve in a pathway or the nested rhythm of doorways and windows—subtly guides our movements and interactions. The result is not just a more aesthetically pleasing city, but one that cultivates stronger social ties and a greater sense of belonging.

As this body of evidence grows, it challenges the assumption that beauty and function are separate, or that style debates are the most important design issue. Instead, the focus is shifting to measurable structural properties of spatial geometry that support life—biological life, social life, and ecological sustainability. The possible combinations of these geometries are vast, as we can see from the endless varieties of beautiful traditional architecture around the world. This research opens up a powerful path forward: to design cities not merely as collections of buildings, but as living systems shaped by the same structural principles that have guided nature and culture for millennia.

Nor is this a mandate to reproduce only the successful forms of the past—although revival is certainly a time-honored practice, resulting in so many of the most beloved and enduring places in human history. Our contemporary attitudes forbidding it have resulted in a vast impoverishment of the rich genetic material available for placemaking. But there is also ample space for innovation, for a mix of the new and the old, and for new artistic expressions -- so long as they are aimed at enriching the lives of people and place.

There is also a hard truth in these findings for those of us working to build contemporary environments: too often, we have let our artistic prerogatives and ideologies, or our technical concerns, obscure the fundamental human properties needed in our built environments. The evidence is clear that we have to do better. It's ultimately a matter of professional responsibility, and an imperative for professional reform in our time.

At the 62nd International Making Cities Livable conference in Potsdam, Germany (October 15-19, 2025), we will hear from several leaders in this exciting new field of research, as well as practitioners, policymakers and educators who are driving forward reforms. Here are a few of them:

Dr. Alexandros Lavdas, from EURAC Research in Bolzano, Italy, will discuss how organized complexity in urban form—hierarchical scaling, richness, and coherence—engages the brain in ways that promote comfort, interaction, and emotional connection. Drawing from neuroscience and urban theory, he shows how these spatial properties foster both individual and social flourishing.

University of Cambridge researcher Cleo Valentine will present new findings on how certain visual patterns in building façades—especially repetitive, high-contrast designs—can induce subtle neurological stress known as allostatic loading. Using AI-generated façade studies, her work shows how the visual environment can contribute to chronic physiological strain, adding to our understanding of how architecture affects health at a biological level.

Professor Justin Hollander will explore how spatial design influences cognitive function, emotional comfort, and mental clarity. His research in cognitive architecture shows that complexity, coherence, and legibility in urban form can reduce stress and support better memory, navigation, and mental restoration—critical benefits for dense, walkable neighborhoods.

Dr. Nikos Salingaros will highlight how fractal geometry—patterns found in nature and in traditional architecture—supports human well-being through biophilic responses. His work shows that mid-level fractal structures can reduce stress and enhance our experience of beauty, helping to reframe ornament and geometry as essential to human-centered design.

These and many other speakers will dive into the new research, and its practical implications for design, building and governance today, aimed at making cities livable. Their work shows that the geometry of our built environments—and the beauty we perceive—is deeply connected to our human biology, behavior, and ecological well-being. Their insights point to a new paradigm in design—one that supports livability life-affirming spatial qualities, with specific tools and strategies to drive forward positive change.

----

For more information on the 62nd IMCL conference, October 15-19, 2025, please visit https://www.imcl.online/potsdam-2025.